The ADL reports that Rush Limbaugh “raised the possibility that liberal Jews were having ‘buyer’s remorse’ with President Obama in light of the outcome of the Senate election in Massachusetts.” Limbaugh:
To some people, banker is a code word for Jewish; and guess who Obama is assaulting? He’s assaulting bankers. He’s assaulting money people. And a lot of those people on Wall Street are Jewish. So I wonder if there’s – if there’s starting to be some buyer’s remorse there.
Abe Foxman responded as follows:
Rush Limbaugh reached a new low with his borderline anti-Semitic comments about Jews as bankers, their supposed influence on Wall Street, and how they vote.
Limbaugh’s references to Jews and money in a discussion of Massachusetts politics were offensive and inappropriate. While the age-old stereotype about Jews and money has a long and sordid history, it also remains one of the main pillars of anti-Semitism and is widely accepted by many Americans. His notion that Jews vote based on their religion, rather than on their interests as Americans, plays into the hands of anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists.
This is classic ADL-talk. Anything said about Jews as Jews is anathema. No need to actually look at the evidence that indeed Jews are vastly overrepresented in the Wall Street elite and that they gave vastly disproportionate amounts to Obama.
What’s surprising is that Limbaugh would go there, given the long track record of the ADL in condemning any mention of Jews as influencing anything at all. Unless he’s living under a rock (and he isn’t), Limbaugh must have known of the consequences and did it anyway. Perhaps things really are changing for the better.
This is from a previous article reacting to ADL angst about anti-Jewish comments that were appearing in a great many of the comment sections of news articles on the internet in the wake of financial meltdown in 2008:
The problem is that we all know that there is more than a grain of truth to the claim that Jews run Wall Street, just as there is more than a grain of truth to the claim that Jews run Hollywood. In fact, as we previously pointed out, Benjamin Ginsberg, a prominent social scientist, noted during the 1990s that 50% of Wall Street executives were Jewish.
Nevertheless, the immediate reaction of the ADL is to attempt to stifle any such comments and simply label them as “anti-Semitism.” …
Such heavy-handed attempts to squelch discussion of Jewish influence can be seen on a wide range of issues, most notably the role of the Israel Lobby in influencing US foreign policy in the Middle East. When John Mearsheimer and Steven Walt published their work on the Israel Lobby, organizations like the ADL were quick to condemn them as anti-Semites and compared their writing to classic anti-Jewish themes in writings like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
But the bottom line is that there is no attempt to soberly and rationally determine the real extent of Jewish involvement in this disaster. The entire topic of Jewish involvement in the financial system is taboo. It is not surprising that the police-state tactics favored by the ADL fuel the flames of anti-Jewish conspiracy theories when all attempts to raise the issue of Jewish influence in the financial system or other areas of American life are met with powerful efforts to enforce silence.
The situation is similar to a previous financial scandal — the one involving Michael Milken, the notorious 1980s junk bond king. As a 1989 National Review article noted, Milken “is Jewish, as were many of his partners and peers. (Indeed, about the only sympathy he has gotten is from those who see his prosecution as an instance of anti-Semitism.)”
Much of the discussion of the Jewish role in this financial scandal centered around the book Den of Thieves by James B. Stewart. Jewish activist Alan Dershowitz called Den of Thieves an “anti-Semitic screed” and attacked a review by Michael M. Thomas in the New York Times Book Review because of his “gratuitous descriptions by religious stereotypes.” Thomas’s review contained the following passage:
“James B. Stewart . . . charts the way through a virtual solar system of peculation, past planets large and small, from a metaphorical Mercury representing the penny-ante takings of Dennis B. Levine’s small fry, past the middling ($10 million in inside-trading profits) Mars of Mr. Levine himself, along the multiple rings of Saturn — Ivan F. Boesky, his confederate Martin A. Siegel of Kidder, Peabody, and Mr. Siegel’s confederate Robert Freeman of Goldman, Sachs — and finally back to great Jupiter: Michael R. Milken, the greedy billion-dollar junk-bond kingdom in which some of the nation’s greatest names in industry and finance would find themselves entrapped and corrupted.”
Sounds like a Jewish cabal to me. Thomas later noted that “If I point out that nine out of 10 people involved in street crimes are black, that’s an interesting sociological observation. If I point out that nine out of 10 people involved in securities indictments are Jewish, that is an anti-Semitic slur. I cannot sort out the difference. . . .” …
The difference between the current crisis and the Den of Thieves debacle is that the consequences to the financial system of the current Wall Street disaster are far greater and they are far more likely to have a negative effect on pretty much everyone. When a new version of Den of Thieves describes in detail the Jewish involvement in the current catastrophe, perhaps not even Alan Dershowitz or the ADL will be able to keep the lid on the bottle.
Facing the Future as a Minority
Media kingpin and famous Jew Mort Zukerman sure has been expressing lots of buyers remorse over Obama the last few days on national TV.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortimer_Zuckerman
Yes they have and I dont know why because he is Rham and Axels whipping boy.
More and more people are bravely speaking out about Jews which is great news.
When the White House tapes of Billy Graham and Nixon were released in which they were discussing Jewish control of media the Jews went ballistic. I exchanged a few emails with Rabbi Lerner and I told him that rather than attacking Graham and Nixon, an objective investigation should be done and then the facts about who controlled media should be reported.
He emailed me back and told me that it is anti Semitic to count Jews in the media. Right after that the results of a new study revealed that its White Male Christians who control the media. I think that’s why the word chuzpah, is Yiddish.
It doesn’t matter what Jews say about Limbaugh, the most important thing is how his right wing Christian and White fans react to his comments. If they support him and agree with him and refuse to turn against him and call him an anti Semite then that is the best news of all.
Here’s Zuckerman on FOX attacking Obama:
youtube.com/watch?v=UC1oRvzHdhQ
At the very end he literally defends Wall Street bankers and blames the financial crisis on people who filled out incorrect mortgage applications.
This is hysterical, like a Larry David routine.
The Gegenraße reveled in smearing Obama and negritude in our White faces, and now they have buyer’s remorse??
@junghans they don’t care as long as they are causing chaos and confusion and having everyone fight one another. As long as they are tearing down they’re happy. Just look at the mess they created in the ME.
Instead of Israel, Jews are happily immigrating back to Germany where they get free luxurious apartments as part of reparations. They laugh about this and it appears that the state of Israel will probably fall from within. I mean seriously, does anyone believe that Jews actually want to live among other Jews? They’re parasites who must have a host.
Rush Limbaugh’s Jewish Problem..
What explains Rush Limbaugh’s weak-kneed “some of my best friends are Jews” response to the accusation leveled by everyone’s favorite free speech defender, Abe Foxman of the ADL? Foxman is troubled that Rush’s (true) observation that many of Wall Street’s bankers are Jewish is “borderline anti-Semitism”. Of course Rush was stating the obvious in a complementary fashion, implying that perhaps the Obama Administration’s war on Wall Street may be motivated by Jew-hatred. Now how could a normally shrewd and spot-on observer of who really dominates American politics and culture be so naïve? Surely Rush must know that Obama’s top advisors, Emmanuel and Axelrod, are Jews, as are an overwhelming number of top Democrats who happen to be prominent Rush haters ( Charles Schumer, Barney Frank, Barbara Boxer, Alan Greyson, Anthony Wiener, Jerrold Nadler, Jan Schakowsky, to name a few). Ditto many of Obama’s unelected Czars (Cass Sunstein, anyone?). See here for an impressive list of who’s who in politics and economics:
http://zsidozas.wordpress.com/2009/01/20/obamas-jewschange-we-cant-believe-in/
Certainly Rush must be aware of the predominant Jewish presence among the “union thugs” that Rush rails against? Seiu’s Andy Stern? How about ACORN’s Rathke brothers? What about Rush’s main media detractors such as the majority of NY Times staffers from Pinch Sulzberger on down. Media Matters’ Eric Alterman? Ditto. Jonathan Alter of Newsweek? Ditto. Rachel Maddow? Wolf Blitzer? George Soros? Ditto Ditto Ditto. What about those opposed to Rush’s beloved Club Gitmo, the ACLU and the National Lawyers Guild? How about pro-immigration groups like the SPLC? A cursory view of their membership lists will illustrate the obvious. And all this from a group that numbers only 2% of the American population. Of course Rush’s reflexive answer is that this is all coincidence. These people are all “Liberals first”. But does Rush really wish to side with those powerful Jews who are not “Liberals first” ie the “Neocons”—the architects of the disastrous wars that effectively destroyed the Presidency of Rush’s beloved friend, George W. Bush? Or the Wall Street bankers from Goldman Sachs, so instrumental in shredding our economy that Rush was so passionately defending? (No need to even bring up Bernie Madoff, Ivan Boesky, Michael Milken, Worldcom, Enron, etc, etc etc is there?)
So what then explains Rush’s limp-wristed response to Abe Foxman? Not ignorance, but a tacit understanding of who real power rests with, and that he violated the twin sacred rules of politics: One must not ever mention the ethnicity of these folks, and only Jews can criticize other Jews.
A.L. Schlageter
North Carolina
I have all the respect in the world for Abe Foxman and his life’s work ; but how could he attack Rush who consistently shows absolute support for Isreal? He took a trip to the Middle East at Isreal’s expense and refused to tour with the Palestians. He would never allow himself to be compromozed by even considering Palestinian propaganda. He hasn’t stayed on the air for ove 20 years by being anti-semetic.
Rush Limbaugh is a Jewish shill. Any smart white person would do well to tune him out.
Justin Huber is spot on. Limbaugh may be a “big fat idiot” according to the scat and fart Jewish comic turned US senator — Are there ANY gentiles left in the senate? — but he is a reliable Zionist stooge, you can be sure.
Limbaugh survives because he serves Jewish interests. Plain and simple. What Limbaugh said was so obvious and inoccuous, it’s absurd that he should have to defend himself. But, the whole episode shifts the debate to the pro-Jewish extreme.
What if Limbaugh had said that Jews effectively control the entire US (true), via their control of the banking, media, and retail industries, among others? What if Limbaugh stated (truly) that Zionist Jews despise gentiles and consider them idiots for ever allowing the creation of Israel? What if Limbaugh stated that Jews have very disproportionately assassinated (physically or materially) their political and/or economic rivals?
Limbaugh is an ass, and his stooge followers have no idea what’s really going on in the world.
Rush isn’t going to tell them. He likes his job.
“Rush Limbaugh is a Jewish shill. Any smart white person would do well to tune him out”
Of course.
But —
“Rush isn’t going to tell them. He likes his job.”
But –
Jews always go too far. Foxman pouncing on Rush Limbaugh, of all people, is an example.
Consider: If Rush, philosemite that he is, can’t keep them off his back, if, IF, this thing explodes into a free-for-all that Rush finds himself in danger of LOSING that beloved job because Foxman, et al., just can’t control their hubristic impulses, maybe, maybe, maybe, it’ll be just the necessary push to convert Rush to our side. IF that ever happened, oh, boy, has he got a loyal army out there just waiting for WN leadership and don’t even know it.
Rush Limbaugh is not somebody we want on our side. At least in my opinion. For me, white nationalism is a revolutionary movement not a “conservative” one.
I hope everyone is aware that not a few tought Jewish organisations have defended Limbaugh.
Please chalk this down as something positive.
http://www.jpost.com/JewishWorld/JewishNews/Article.aspx?id=167227